First NJ Red Light Cameras

On Aug 30, 1:49*pm, N8N > wrote:
> Prove that RLC's prevent any of these incidents, or even have benefits
> that outweigh negative consequences. *(hint: you can't.)


prove that any law inforcement is helpful.


> Prove that yellow intervals will be set for safety and not for profit
> at RLC controlled intersections. *(hint: see above.)

What has a red-light-camera to do with a unlawful configured yellow-
light-phase?
What is the difference between being caught by a policeman and a
camera?

On Aug 30, 6:52*pm, Nate Nagel > wrote:
> > A police man is considerable more expensive than a red light camera.
>
> Not really. *A RLC contract for four cameras costs $350K, or else the
> small city I live in got ripped off.

I don't see why a red-light-camera should be more expensive than the
sum of its parts:

* some radar to detect a car
* some computer
* the camera with a flash
* maybe some cellphone to send pictures

Overall it should be considerable cheaper than a policeman
-- taking into account the time it lasts and the price.

wrote:

> That doesn't necessarily cause them to run lights. Studies have shown
> that virtually all drivers will stop on red.

I'd sure like to see that study.

Around here -- particularly protected left turns --the red like means
"If I am number three throught the red, the car two cars back is
supposed to stop."

On Aug 31, 12:06*pm, " > wrote:
> > Timing is not the issue if there is a high volume of traffic from both
> > streets trying to get through an intersection. *That is, no matter how
> > the light is timed it won't be enough and some drivers will have to
> > wait for multiple cycles.
>
> That doesn't necessarily cause them to run lights. Studies have shown
> that virtually all drivers will stop on red. No one wants to die. It
> is up to traffic engineers to find that sweet spot where compliance
> will be optimized. Timing is certainly the issue.

At congested intersections there simply isn't any "sweet spot".

I don't know what studies you refer to, but drivers at congested
intersections--where they wait for multiple light cycles--get
impatient and tend to run the yellow and red when the signal changes.
They've already been waiting for a while and don't want to wait
through another full cycle, which could be five more mintues.

Also on highways where the speed limit is higher a yellow light means
drivers must hit the brakes and slow down from their hgih speed.
They'd rather keep going and thus tend to run yellow and red lights.

Many major traffic lights have a brief all-red cycle during the
change. Drivers are aware of this and figure they have extra safe
time.

wrote:
> On Aug 31, 8:41 am, Larry Sheldon > wrote:
>> wrote:
>>> On Aug 30, 2:10 pm, "John A. Weeks III" > wrote:
>>>> The only way to get people to obey the red
>>>> lights is to have the traffic light offenders suffer some
>>>> consequence of their action, preferably before they kill someone.
>>> Actually, it's not the only way, and it's actually ineffective. If
>>> safety is their goal, and not revenue enhancement, they should try
>>> proper signal timing first to get better compliance than putting up a
>>> camera at an improperly timed signal,.
>> I've always thought it would be a good idea to put those retractable
>> tire ripper thing in the street--extend halfway through the yellow,
>> retract on the green.
>
> It's legal in nearly all states to enter an intersection on yellow.
> Laws of physics always trump laws of traffic!

When I learned to drive and for many years after that, the yellow light
was functionally meaningless except as a warning that red was about to
appear.

It was illegal to be in the intersection defined by limit lines, painted
or not, when facing a red light


--
Requiescas in pace o email Two identifying characteristics
of System Administrators:
Ex turpi causa non oritur actio Infallibility, and the ability to
learn from their mistakes.
Eppure si rinfresca

ICBM Targeting Information:
http://tinyurl.com/4sqczs
http://tinyurl.com/7tp8ml

On Aug 30, 6:50*pm, Nate Nagel > wrote:

> Additionally, the "max legal speed" is often well below the natural flow
> speed of a given road.

this is because two things:

* speed limits on good highways are too low
* cameras to catch speeders are missing.
You are kind of lucky if you being caught by a policeman.
I'm all the time doing around 100mil/h on highways (if nobody is
blocking the left lane)
and I got caught last time 18months ago.


I don't think that speed limits inside cities are too low.

On Mon, 31 Aug 2009 09:50:10 -0700 (PDT), Peter
> wrote:

>
>Who actually argued here for making the yellow phase shorter?

And it is documented that various communities have done exactly that
after installing RLC's at an intersection and seen revenue go down as
compliance goes up.

See: http://tinyurl.com/5tqdv5 for stories and references.

>The lenght of the yellow phase must be set by law -- depending on the
>max. legal speed on the intersection.

I'd like to believe that the cities that have been caught know that
now, but I doubt it.

>You are arguing against red-light-cameras by arguing against something
>else (too short yellow phase),which should be illegal.
>In fact you are arguing against enforcement of traffic rules.

No, we are not. We are arguing against the use of traffic enforcemenet
at a means of generating revenue.

>What is different from getting observed by a policeman or by a camera
>when running a red light?

If the town is playing by the rules, nothing. But as the article above
shows, many towns are not playing by the rules.

--
"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to
purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve
neither Liberty nor Safety."
--Benjamin Franklin

Larry Sheldon wrote:
> wrote:
>
>> That doesn't necessarily cause them to run lights. Studies have shown
>> that virtually all drivers will stop on red.
>
> I'd sure like to see that study.
>
> Around here -- particularly protected left turns --the red like means
> "If I am number three throught the red, the car two cars back is
> supposed to stop."

We were seeing this type of RLR a lot at the intersections near where I
live, too. When they put the RLC in at one intersection about a half
mile away, this type of RLR stopped immediately, at the RLC intersection
(even though the dedicated left turn lanes weren't even rigged, RLC
sensor loops only on the thru lanes) and the nearby intersections. And
it has stayed that way even though there have been no cameras in the
housings for 5 years (the housings and flash units are still there, the
signs and sensor loops came out with the last resurfacing job 3 years
ago). I don't see this type of RLR very much in town at all any more.

--Andy

On Aug 31, 9:54*am, Jim Yanik > wrote:

> OTOH,lengthening the yellow reduces the number of RL runners.


until people are used to the longer phase and exploit it again until
the maximum.

On Aug 31, 2:27*pm, Peter > wrote:
> On Aug 31, 9:54*am, Jim Yanik > wrote:
>
> > OTOH,lengthening the yellow reduces the number of RL runners.
>
> until people are used to the longer phase and exploit it again until
> the maximum.

The study done by the state of VA a couple years ago showed that any
accomodation was minimal, and that the reduction in RLRing did reduce
slightly over time, but only slightly. DAGS for it if you're
interested, I know that it's still posted on the web somewhere. While
the "executive summary" is decidedly neutral on the subject of RLCs,
if you read the whole report, two things stand out:

1) the RLCs resulted in a NET INCREASE in crashes

and

2) correctly setting the yellow light timings at the intersections at
which this was done resulted in far greater safety improvements than
installing the RLCs.

nate